Join Now
Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!
Taken a while back and uploaded but recieved hardly anything for it whilst every one i know who seen it (non epzers) really liked it above all my other work.
For this reason i have added it for Crit in the hope to find out why?
Please tell me it's been bugging me for ages!
| Title: | Molly |
| Username: | |
| Uploaded: | 22 Aug 2007 - 1:42 PM |
| Camera: | Nikon D200 |
| Lens: | Nikon 18 - 70 |
| Recording media: | RAW (digital) |
| Tags: | Digitally manipulated, Pets / captive animals |
| Votes: | Voting Disabled |
![]() | Critique Wanted |
Awards
Awards have been disabled on this photoComments
Having looked at your folio, Gareth, this does seem to be rather different from your usual stuff.
From the thumbnail I couldn't actually be too sure what the subject was! I suspect many people just gave the thumbnail a glance and moved on without opening it.
A mid-coloured background (e.g dark grey) may have helped here.
No - it's not a rubbish picture, GaZn. However, you have really challenged yourself with the subject/lighting. All is not lost, though, as you've shot in RAW - which is absolutely brilliant; a kind of 'Get Out of Jail Free' card! Do you use PhotoShop? If so - import the image into your RAW converter programme and manipulate it so you get detail in the white parts of the cat. Click on Open and import it into PS. Now repeat the process - but this time, adjust the exposure so you get textural detail in the black parts of the cat. Don't worry if you blow the highlights. When you're happy, open in PS. You will now have two images open. Click on the Move tool, then while holding down the Shift key, drag one image on top of the other. Close the one you've just dragged across. You now have one image showing on screen. I hope you use Layers? Bring up Layers (Windows>Layers) - and you will see your two images on two different layers. Put a Layers Mask on the top one (email me and I will go into more detail if you're unsure how). Now you can "paint" in detail where you want it. Again, rather than go into this here - I will explain more if you need it in an email. Hope this helps?
It certainly isn't a rubbish picture, but it is a challenging image for collecting votes or comments.
The thumbnail isn't strong enough to get many views (i would have probably passed it by in the normal gallery). Once I opened it I liked it, but not enough to vote (something has to appeal to me quite a lot to get a vote). As for commenting, well I just don't have anything particularly helpful to say, so would probably chose to say nothing.
Sorry I can't help you, buty maybe it helps you understand why people view but then don't vote or comment.
Rubbish it is not - far too dark it is. One problem with criticism sections such as this is that people seem to say nothing at all unless the shot is very good. The whole idea is to gather views as to why there may be problems and your comments show you realise that, but are not getting the 'service' - at least initially.
You already have the answer from later comments - the subject is fine but under exposed, and the very fact that you shot in RAW means you have not used the conversion software well.
This is basically under exposed - easily corrected in RAW files within reason. Don't let the magazines and pundits fool you that you MUST shoot in RAW. If you don't like the conversion process, or find it boring - shoot in best quality JPEG.
I am reasonably experienced, but only switch to RAW if I am expecting exposure problems from certain subjects. Almost all of the time you will find it VERY DIFFICULT INDEED to differentiate between a correctly processed RAW file and a best quality JPEG.
Honest!
Paul
You have the white fur very well exposed and this maybe is the key to the problem - a camera can only take one exposure at a time, and in a very black and white case like this, if it exposes properly for the white bits (as here) then you're bound to get the dark bits blacked out. If it was exposed more to bring out detail in the shadow areas, then the highlights (white fur) would have been blown out to white. In a landscape or a still sublect there is a way round this by taking two different exposures, one for the light areas and one for the dark, then blending the two together selectively to get the best of both. In a wriggly moving subject such as this that might not be quite possible, but this is where RAW comes in useful. Take the RAW file and make two new files out of it, one with exposure increased to maximise detail in the black fur, and the other with exposure decreased to maximise detail in the white fur. then put one as a layer over the other and selectively erase away to get the best exposed bits out of each area. painstaking to do properlyand subtly, but may be worth it
Stephen
Like Pete said, it's almost like an abstract shot, and in that sense I like it a lot
Must admit that it was pure curiosity which made me open the thumbnail... as someone else has said. And, as already said, black and white are very difficult to get balanced. The black fur is slightly too dark to be able to tell where the cat 'is'. 'Shadows/highlights' in photoshop could be a help, especially as the expert thinks the back leg a little 'burnt'. (Try lowering the strength of that next time) You can lessen the shadows and also the highlights with that tool. Otherwise... down to putting a little reflected light towards the back and standing a little further away with the camera flash?
Add a Comment
ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.

















